tv Meet the Press NBC November 11, 2012 10:30am-11:30am EST
this morning on "meet the press" -- an unfolding scandal in washington. and a new battle over the fiscal cliff. the election celebration is short-lived. a surprise resignation by cia director david petraeus comes days before congressional hearings over the attack on th u.s. consulate in benghazi. we'll get reaction this morning from capitol hill and the very latest reporting on this developing story from our chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell, who broke the story friday afternoon. also the president and republicans get set to negotiate new taxes and spending cuts. is a breakthrough possible? >> i'm open to compromise. i'm open to new ideas. we've debated over and over
again. and on tuesday night we found out that the majority of americans agree with my approach. >> mr. president, this is your moment. we're ready to be led. not as democrats or republicans but as americans. now, we want you to lead. >> where does it all go from sneer we'll ask democratic senator from new york chuck schumer and republican senator from oklahoma tom coburn. also we check in with cnbc's jim cramer, hear about the economic stakes should washington fail to avert fiscal disaster by the end of the year. plus, what is the future of the gop after a stinging defeat for romney and the republicans? and how will president obama govern in a second term? we'll talk to a newly elected document congressman, joaquin castro. plus republican strategist steve schmidt, presidential historian doris kearns goodwin, nbc's political director and chief white house correspondent chuck todd, and the "washington post's" bob woodward.
>> announcer: from nbc news in washington, the world's longest-running television program, this is "meet the press." with david gregory. >> and good sunday morning. the newly re-elected president's message on friday, get back to work. but the focus of that work and on that work is now overshadowed by friday afternoon's resignation of cia director david petraeus, which sent as you know shock waves through washington. new details emerging now this weekend about the fbi investigation that led to the discovery of what officials believe was an extramarital affair between petraeus and his biographer, paula broadwell. and of course so many questions about where this goes from here. joining me now for the latest on this developing story, the "washington post's" bob woodward and our own chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell who broke the story as i mentioned on friday. so andrea, here we are on sunday morning, new details. we know there was someone close to petraeus who got threatening e-mails. a whistleblor. she goes to the fbi. and that's how they get to the
affair. >> this other woman, and we know she's not in the government and that she's not a family member, complained to the fbi about what she felt were harass k and threatening e-mails. it was that investigation that led -- they were anonymous e-mails. that led to broadwell's e-mail account. and by examining broadwell's, paula broadwell the biographer's e-mail account that's they uncovered or stumbled as they put it into this -- >> there were actually explicit e-mails between broadwell and petraeus. >> or some indication in those e-mails of an ongoing relationship. that's according to fbi officials and other officials with whom we've spoken. it was that -- and we should stress, there was never an investigation into petraeus. and they have pretty much shut down any idea that there was any kind of security or national security leaks. so this is not a criminal matter. and it would have rested there had not, and this is what is new in the last 24hours, had not it come to the attention from an fbi whistleblower to a member of congress, who then reported to eric cantor, the republican
leader, who then said to the fbi, you have to take this further. they were not at that stage going to the white house with it. and there are a lot of questions raised, why did it first com to the attention of the head of national intelligence on tuesday at 5:00 on election day? why did it not come to the white house's attention until the next day, wednesday? >> bob, before i turn to you, paula broadwell, she writes a book called "all in." this is the biography of david petraeus. and you know, as part of promoting that book she did some interviews including on "the daily show" that talked about how they struck up this relationship, biographer and subject and her trips to afghanistan. let's watch a portion of that. >> to get to know him he wanted to run with you. so you ran together. >> this is a typical mechanism he uses to get to know young people. he's done it throughout his life. so it was an opportunity for me to interview him on a run. and i think it was -- i thought i'd test him, but he was going to test me. and it ended up being kind of a
test for both of us and so we both ran pretty quickly. but that was the foundation of our -- [ laughter ] -- relationship. when i was in kabul we would do a lot of interviews on runs. for him it was a good distraction from the war. of course he's a bit concerned, as someone in his position would be, about legacy, and he also, you know, came at it from a mentoring point of view and wanted to help me with this project. >> petraeus 60. she's 40, a mother of two, married herself. what more stands out to you this morning? >> that obviously he was enchanted with her. interestingly enough i think the david petraeus story is not going away. just this coming week there are going to be hearings in the house in the intelligence committees on benghazi episode a month ago where four americans including the ambassador were killed. it turns out that petraeus a week and a half ago went to tripoli, libya and conducted his own personal inquiry into
benghazi, ierviewed the station chief, actually got the base chief from benghazi down, interviewed him. interviewed the head i think twice of the quick reaction force that was involved in this episode. so he knows the full story. he has a lot of credibility with republicans, who as we know are on fire about benghazi. and now the acting cia director, mike morel, is going to have to present that evidence. >> what was going to be the fakeaway from what petraeus had presented had he testified? >> i think it would essentially back up the white house. and there are still unanswered questions and so forth. but one of the things petraeus always did was dig deep. and so he -- apparently there are videos and tapes and pictures and things that can be shown. it is not going away. and the question will be i
suspect will he be asked to testify as a private citizen either informally, in closed door, and so forth. probably only petraeus can -- if he has the data stop this benghazi frenzy. >> andrea, did he have to resign? >> a lot of people say not. that he eventually felt that he had to. we know that the head of intelligence, clapper, told him he should. the president asked for 24 hours to think it over. and then -- >> all this comes in on election night. to clapper and the white house. >> which is why conspiracy theorists are going -- running wild with it. i am persuaded as far as all of my reporting that the white house did not know about this until wednesday, that clapper didn't know about it until tuesday night. and just a word. it's veterans' day. and we should say something about holly petraeus. she has been a hero among the military families for her work. when they were stationed in kentucky, she was not the general's wife. she was really one of the team.
and her work on consumer protection and financial education should continue and i hope she can find a way to continue her career. >> there's a political dimension to this for obama and the white house. they wanted to keep petraeus. petraeus is very important, credible. as we know from history, sue yau directors can cause presidents great grief. the bay of pigs. wmd not in iraq and so forth. also, they can do very important things for presidents like the bin laden raid, which was a covert cia -- >> and i know from spending time with him in his current role how much he loved this job, was engaged by this job, and had tremendous band width in terms of his counterterror operations. so there will be a lot of questions about who replaces him and -- >> he was transforming the agency. he had a rocky start. but he was seeing a global visi vision, the economic future, looking at asia, looking at china. he was going well beyond the counterterror operations.
really transform that. >> he did the honorable thing. he had to resign given this. i don't think there was any question. >> more on this when we discuss it with our roundtable, andrea mitchell, bob woodward, thank you both very much. i want to turn now to two key voices in the senate, democratic senator from new york chuck schumer and oklahoma repuican senator tom coburn. senators, welcome, both of you back to "meet the press." senator schumer, let me start with you this morning. dianne feinstein, the senate intelligence committee chairwoman indicated this after the news of petraeus. "i wish president obama had not accepted this resignation but i understand and respect the decision." do you wish he had not res yind over this? >> i think i would leave that decision to general petraeus. he's been such a hero in many ways. i've known him. he's a new yorker. i've spent time in iraq with him. your heart breaks for him and his wife. if he felt it was appropriate to resign, i leave it with him.
>> senator coburn, your thoughts on that. >> i think leadership matters and setting an example. i don't think he had any choice given the sensitive nature of everything he does that he could have any questions about his character's integrity so i think he did the honorable thing. >> senator coburn, let me stay with you. the benghazi questions that bob woodward just mentioned with new information this morning. petrae petraeus's own fact finding on this preparing to testify. both republicans and democrats as well with a lot of questions about the cia's role, whether there was enough communication, whether there was enough security on the ground and why not if that was not the case that would endanger our personnel there in our consulate. what do you believe about their remaining questions and what role petraeus still plays in answering them? >> well, i think he needs to answer them. he was obviously the person in charge of the cia and he has information that probably other people don't have. so i think it's still going to be important that his input comes into the conclusion and what we find about what went wrong -- were made.
we obviously weren't prepared. i think you have to spend time to find out what happened and how it happened. and get to the bottom of it so we don't see this kind of mistake again. >> senator schumer? >> yeah, i think first we ought to see what mr. morell has to say and is he able to give the committee the information that general petraeus dug up when he was over there in iraq and then we should take it from there. >> let's talk now about the fiscal cliff, where the debate turns in washington after the election. let's remind our viewers what we mean when we talk about the fiscal cliff. this is what is happening at the end of the year. the bush tax cuts expire, so taxes go up. the emergency unemployment benefits end. the 2011 payroll tax holiday expires. the alternative minimum tax kicks in. taxes automatically go up. plus, at the same time, you have nearly $1 trillion in spending cuts that are automatic. that's what we mean by the sequester. half of that in defense. also non-defense cuts are triggered. that's what has to be averted,
senator coburn. and here's my bottom line question. my view is that if there's a mandate from this election it's about compromise in washington. so what pain do republicans have to accept to get to a deal in your judgment? >> well, i think you heard the speaker of the house put forward that they're ready for the president to lead. they're ready to agree to revenue increases. but i think they're also interested in making sure that we downsize appropriately the federal government in terms of its waste. there is -- there is no question that we have a government that's twice the size it was 11 years ago. and we can find the money through sequestration or directly from what the house has passed, which is different than sequestration but the same amount.
i'd also remind you that the $1 trillion is over ten years, so 100 billion over a $3.7 trillion budget, which is less than 3%. >> let me zero in on my question. i just think it's important before we go through the litany on this, is the bottom line that republicans losing this election means, as the president said, that they have to give in and allow taxes to go up on wealthier americans? >> i think they already agreed to that. i think you heard john boehner say that already. we've had votes in the senate where we've actually gotten rid of tax credits. i think that's a given. and i think the vast majority of americans agree with that. the question is how do you do that and how do you allow taxes to rise at the same time you fix the real problem? and the real problem is uncontrolled entitlement spending and a government that has grown massively. not just under this administration, under republican administration. >> let me turn to senator schumer on this point. >> so you have to approach both sides of it. >> let me turn to senator schumer.
i'm going to ask you the same question. if the mandate is compromised, what do democrats have to be prepared to accept as a painful outcome in order to achieve compromise? >> well, i agree with you, the mandate is compromise. that's why we have a divided house and senate. and i think if the house stands for anything it's cut government spending, as tom coburn said, and i think we're going to have to do more of it. we heard the mandate in 2010, where it was a clear mandate, cut spending. and we did. we cut $900 billion in spending that we didn't like, painful to us. but there's also a clear mandate on the other side, david, and that is the president campaigned on letting the bush tax cuts expire above people of $250,000 income. he campaigned on it clearly. he didn't back off from it. the exit polls showed that 60% of the people agreed with it. and i think that's the other side and what's in my judgment, maybe a little different than
tom's, what's messed up these agreements is revenues. we never really get real revenues because people believe in some things like dynamic scoring, sort of a counterintuitive view that if you cut taxes you will get deficit reduction and increased government revenues. it doesn't make sense. i call it rumpelstiltskin, after the gnome who turned straw into gold. it's a fairy tale. soe need the republicans to do in 2012 what we did in 2010. we hear the mandate, continue to cut spending, but they have to hear the mandate, real revenues, not this kind of stuff like dynamic scoring that speaker boehner did mention. >> i have talked to a top republican in the senate in recent days and said look, the president has gotten some leverage on taxes but it was nice to hear him say, this source said that he talked about more revenue, not necessarily higher rates. you have talked about that this week as well, senator schumer. could you live with not raising tax rates and finding a way to
get enough revenue through closing loopholes and by other means to raise revenues? >> yeah, well, it's not mathematically possible if you stick by the other tenet, which both parties agree on, which is not raise taxes on people below $250,000. in other words, if you're going to get to the bowles-simpson number of $4 trillion of deficit reduction, which we have to do, and you're not going to increase taxes on the middle class, $250,000 or lower, which we shouldn't. their incomes are shrinking. the only way to do it. the only way mathematically i've seen to do it is go to that 39.6% rate. if someone can show another plan that doesn't do that we can look at it. but no one's shown that because it's mathematically impossible. >> senator coburn, your thoughts on that. >> well, i put out a year and a half ago the subsidies for the rich and famous where the well connected and well-heeled in this country have benefited
themselves through the tax code. and we can get $39 billion a year just through very simple changes in terms of tax credits and limiting total tax deductions. and that's the other way, which chuck has not recognized, is if you limit total deductions and exemptions for those above $250,000, what you can essentially do is raise all sorts of money, which nobody really wants to increase revenues because it does have a negative, detrimental effect on the economy. but in fact, that's the part of the bargain that you have to do. and we're at historic lows on revenues. so i've always agreed to it. i voted for the simpson-bowles, i've been part of the gang of six, gang of eight. i agree that we have to go there, but how we go there is very important in terms of the incentives for capital investment in this country. and we have do it in a way that does not diminish that. >> let me turn quickly to
lessons from this election and where things go beyond this negotiation over fiscal matters. senator schumer, immigration. are we going to get comprehensive immigration reform? it sounds like, if you listen to the house speaker, they've had a chang of heart, they want a comprehensive plan. is there news to be made on this? >> yeah, i think so. senator graham and i have talked, and we have resuming the talks that were broken off two years ago. we had put together a comprehensive, detailed blueprint on immigration reform. it had the real potential for bipartisan support based on the theory that most americans are for legal immigration but very much against illegal immigration. our plan just to be quick does four things. first of all, close the border, make sure that's shut. second, make sure that there is a non-forgeable document so that employers can tell who was legal and who was illegal and once they hire someone illegally, throw the book at them. third, on legal immigration -- that will stop illegal
immigration in its tracks. third, on legal immigration, let in the people we need, whether they be engineers from our universities, foreign or people to pick the crops. and fourth, a path to citizenship that's fair, which says you have to learn english, you have to go to the back of the line, you've got to have a job, and you can't commit crimes. graham and i are talking to our colleagues about this right now and i think we have a darn good chance using this blueprint to get something done this year. the republican party has learned that being anti-illegal and anti-immigrant doesn't work for them politically and they know it. >> senator coburn, what is the lesson for your party from this election? >> you have to be -- you have to demonstrate what you're for, not what you're against. i think that's the key ingredient. and sell a vision that's positive for america, not a negative vision about what's wrong with america.
i think you have to have both. but we didn't sell a positive vision. we didn't explain to people what we're for. and i think that's the one thing we took away from the election, and that's what was lacking. >> do you see, senator schumer, very quickly, a role for governor romney in this process? would you like to see the president bring him in to, say, the negotiations over the fiscal cliff? >> well, don't know about that. but i would like to see him speak up. i think you could see him struggling in the general election. the hard right had moved him so far over on issues like immigration. and i didn't think his heart was in it. so he could help. you know, we need forces to help. when either party moves too far over, they lose. democrats too far left, republicans too far right. you need some mainstream republican voices. you need the business community to speak up on the fiscal cliff and the need for revenues. you need people like romney and jeb bush and others to talk about doing a comprehensive immigration reform so that the republicans who have the courage to stand up, and tom coburn has
had that courage, don't just hear from the shrill right. and graham is willing to do it on immigration. he's going to say that this morning. we need other people to do the same. >> we will leave it there as this debate continues. senators, thank you both very much. >> you're welcome. coming up here, you heard where both sides stand. we're going to have some reaction to these two senators and analysis on where the negotiations go from here. also, the economic stakes. if lawmakers can't get a deal, what does it mean to all of us? we will check in with the host of cnbc's "mad money," that's jim cramer. also, we'll talk more broadly about the politics post-election and more on the petraeus 1k57b8d that's unfolding around this roundtable. joaquin castro from texas, doris kearns goodwin, historian, of course. more from bob woodward and our own chuck todd as we continue here on "meet the press." -5 years of service. -10 .
-6 years. -8 years. 31 years of service. 26 years. i served for 20 years. -5 years. -3 years. ♪ -i was ready to serve. -just gotten married. ♪ i was right out of school. my family's all military. ♪ you don't know what to expect. then suddenly you're there in another world. -i did my job. -you do your best. i remember the faces. -how everything mattered. -so much more. my buddies. ♪ -my country. -everything. -and everyone i loved. -back home. [ male announcer ] for all who've served and all who serve, we can never thank them enough. -i was eager to serve. -i was ready to serve. i was proud to serve. ♪
coming up, the dow closed friday down 300 points for the week, finishing one of the worst weeks in the stock market, due, in part, about the concerns over the fiscal cliff. we will check in, in addition to the group, jim crime other the economic strike of this debate, whether the business community as well as well might be a natural ally for the white house in these talks, my view of what could happen. we will get into it all
music is a universal language. but when i was in an accident... i was worried the health care system spoke a language all its own with unitedhealthcare, i got help that fit my life. information on my phone. connection to doctors who get where i'm from. and tools to estimate what my care may cost. so i never missed a beat. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.
when you take a closer look... ...at the best schools in the world... ...you see they all have something very interesting in common. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level. let's develop more stars in education. let's invest in our teachers... ...so they can inspire our students. let's solve this.
we are back now with our panel. doris will be starring in -- no, roll the credits, so excited about "lincoln," our political director and chief white house correspondent after epic great work on the campaign, chuck todd. the "washington post's" bob woodward still with us, republican strategist steve schmidt and newly elected democratic congressman from texas, joaquin castro who just happens to have a twin brother who is the mayor of san antonio. oh, my god. >> call him later today. >> not call the mayor, the joke and whole fun with the split screen that will be done never that will get old never. no just fascinating. great to have you here. congratulations on your election. a lot to get to. chuck todd, let's start with this scandal about general petraeus. within this white house this had
to be something that really took them by surprise but then there was a big question does he need to resign? >> it really did. the president did take -- they didn't want to fill this step. it was funny to watch so many fairly high-level white housers on friday didn't know why what was going on. didn't know this whole -- i mean, the president it was a tight circle of people that knew specific reasons and going down that road. this suspect an opening they wanted to fill. they have plenty of openings they wanted to fill, particularly on the national security team. >> who could fill the void here? >> my understanding morel is popular f there was one knock on petraeus you would hear, and this is usually the case when an outsider comes to the cia, bob would know this better that most, they are not that popular with the rank and file. morell, he's career guy, very popular, i wouldn't be surprised if that acting title goes away, how tenant got the job.
>> you know this from the bush administration, petraeus tight with the bush administration, no, sir knot a lot of trust in the obama team of him, fear that he could run for president, not a great relationship between him and the president, seem to have been repaired, had to be part of the backdrop here, a certain lack of trust. >> well, general petraeus spent much of the last decade abroad, he hasser is thfd country very well. did the honorable thing. we have this tendency in washington to want to tear people down when they have made a mistake, when they have fallen -- a legitimate american hero, he has got great contributions to make in the future. he will clearly have to navigate this very difficult personal issue but he has served this country well and this country is more secure today because of general david petraeus and this country owes him a debt of gratitude for that. >> no question about that doris, as i have said this weekend, not exactly a topic that brings husbands and wives closer together. your thoughts about this in terms of what should happen? >> i don't know. i think in general, i wish we
could go back to the time when the private lives of our public figures relevant only if they directly affected their public responsibilities, what would we have done if fdr had not been our leader because he had an affair with lucy mercer. think of the productive years clinton could have had if monica lewinsky hadn't derailed him. we have to figure out a way with get our private sphere in -- we won't get the best people in public life if we don't do that. this is mad sadd a great map, a great leader, for his career to come to an end because of a private matter that affects him and his family and doesn't have national security concerns, i don't know how you unravel it, i wish we could. >> the cia director has to have special stat turks he's to be clean. can't be blackmailed, threatened or deal with the anxiety, my god, are they going to find out about her? he did the right thing, telling associates now you and this is important, david, he is not going to hide under a rock.
he is going to do other things. as steve suggests, his career is not over. his career at the cia is over. that's absolutely the right thing to do i have nope him for 20 years and petraeus is sort of the person the smallest little thing bothers him and to go through this, clearly a man of conscience made a grave mistake and just that, that anxiety is the sort of thing that could set anyone on edge. >> i want to turn to we just heard from accept tour shum and coburn about the fiscal cliff and talk to start about the mandate for the president in his second term, how do we define it? our colleague, ron torn yeah, wrote the following in the national journal on wednesday, digesting the election results. and this question of mandates, what he writes -- congressman, a
democrat in san antonio, in a house still run by the republicans, we have a status quo election from that point of view, how do you define the mandates specifically around the fiscal cliff? >> the mandate for the american people for the congress to take action. david, we have sat here for four years in a gridlock situation and people -- in 2010 and 2012 were clearly frustrated by that i disagree to a large extent, i don't think is a rush stamp but i think the american people said to barack obama we agree with you on a lot of this stuff and want the republican congress to come along. remember, most of the most intransigent folks, alan west, almost michele bachmann, mothers the republican party who made their political careers saying they weren't going to go along with anything that the the president wanted to do they lost their elections.
>> i remember, steve, president bush, two days after the election, holding a press conference, the president will low do it next week earthquake not immediately after the election, talked about how he viewed the mandate. this is what he said back in 2004. >> let me put it to you this way, i earned capital in the campaign, political capital and now i intend to spend it. it is my style. >> so how much capital does president obama have and where does he spend it? >> i think the president has capital in the leeks. his victory was decisive but the map date should you can determined by the outcome of the leeks and what the election has give the american people is divided government and the sides are going to have to work together. the president came to national prominence, promising to be a repairer of the breach in our politics and if he is going to go down in history as a successful president or even a great president or a near-great president, fess going to have to repair the breach in our politics and take leadership from him. >> specifically.
>> the challenge in this i know you will bring in cramer on this, wall street lend up playing the biggest role here. john boehner, can he get a majority of his republicans in the house to go along with whatever deal he cuts with the president? its's up clear to me. it's clear the republican strategy is they want to try to drag out the negotiations because do some short-term compromises, drag it out, see if the political space is better for republicans stay in in six months, the president's capital and leverage is in this small window, i would say the next two months, particularly before the end of the year. i will be curious to see does the president realize the best way to do this go find ten republicans in the senate, cut the deal with tom co-burp, bob corker, lamar alexander, keep mcconnell out of it, do it with 65, 70 members of the senate, cut the deal, bring it over to the house, box -- which boehner secretly might want to be boxed in, by the way, box boehner in
maybe it goes down the first time, a la t.a.r.p., we will see did the president learn anything from his first term how to deal with congressional republicans, don't do it through the leadership? >> house gop fall in line, a tough conference call with him. i want to bring in jim crimer are, host of cnbc's mad money. he is in new york. we see in the course of the campaign a lot of corporate ceos could become natural allies of the president. what he a resolution to this fiscal cliff business business. >> they have to, david, can give the wrap a recession by christmas, we can set it right into place without some agreement. the ceos have, in many ways, mo tore lose than anybody, why the market got hit this week and the market will continue to be hit until year end or an agreement. >> explain further what the economic consequences are. what do you hear on wall street and among corporate leaders about the -- frankly what happens if we go over the fiscal cliff? >> what i'm hearing and i speak to a lot of ceost and every
single different industries they can don't want to hire. they think the single biggest consequence of not knowing what's going to happen is that it's just worth it to lay off t is not worth it to hire because with just a series of unknown of, who can take a chance, who can take a chance with washington, better to scale back retail, restaurant, industrial, fire people, that is the solution to the fiscal cliff until we get an actual resolution. >> jim, i always thought one of the big mistakes of the first obama term, he never had a moment in the rose garden where he was flanked by the biggest business leaders in america and say, look, wither going to work together in common cause to deal with our economy, fiscal position and ultimately affect america's influence in the rest of the world k he have that moment now? >> yes, because -- >> will he? >> the leaders need him. the ceos need him, the businesses are going to go down, stocks are going to go down, theyth is what they care about, their own comp pep session saying and higher stock prices. i'm giving you lower stock prices for certain without a
deal. >> jim cramer, thanks ry much. doris, your point about this, as you look at it. >> what the president those do to build his mandate is play both an inside game and an outside game. he should use that political white house as an asset, more than he has done before. i would have a cocktail hour every night you have 40 republican there is, 40 democrat there is, night after night after night, do what lbj did, more than he has done. the outside game means has to mobilize that base. that base was energized on election night. he said to them, your job is not done it is not just voting it is there to bring pressure on obstructionist it is they don't get a deal done from the outside n i think he signalled it that night because he said i've learned from you, i'm going to be a better president because of you. that was an amazing statement and i think he has learned he needs to use the white house as a political asset more inside and get those people. the tea party pressured everybody that summer, why can't his coalition, which is big per, pressure people? >> i want to take a break and go back to bob woodward who has more reporting on how close they
were on that grand bargain before and what that could tell us where they can go i do want to talk to everybody around here about how is it obama won? chuck's going to show us the about [ female announcer ] want to spend less and retire with more? then don't get nickle and dimed by high cost investments and annoying account fees. at e-trade, our free easy-to-use online tools and experienced retirement specialists can help you build a personalized plan. and with our no annual fee iras and a wide range of low cost investments, you can execute the plan you want at a low cost. so meet with us, or go to etrade.com for a great retirement plan with low cost investments. ♪ [ male announcer ] a european-inspired suspension, but not from germany. ♪ a powerful, fuel-efficient engine, but it's not from japan. ♪ it's a car like no other... inspired by a place like no other.
it's changing the conversation. oh, let me guess --ou see this? more washington gridlock. no, it's worse -- look, our taxes are about to go up. not the taxes on our dividends though, right? that's a big part of our retirement. oh, no, it's dividends, too. the rate on our dividends would more than double. but we depend on our dividends to help pay our bills. we worked hard to save.
well, the president and congress have got to work together to stop this dividend tax hike. before it's too late. we are back with more from our round table, talk about politics and how the president one, i want to talk with the fiscal cliff. bob woodward, offer secret white house document that goes back to the grand bargain negotiations, tell us what it is and what it means, you think. >> well, this is the last offer the president, the white house made last year to speaker boehner to try to reach this $4 trillion grand bargain and it's long and it's tedious and it's
got budget jargon in it, but what it cho shoels a willingness to cut all kinds of things, like tricare, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military for military retirees. tricare, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military for military retirees. tricare, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military for military retirees.e tricare, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military for military retirees. tricare, which is the sacred health insurance program for the military for military retirees. is cut social security, there is a line in there we want to get tax rates down, not only for individuals but for businesses. so obama and the white house were willing to go quite far, in a sense this is the starting point, i guess you will put it up on your website after the budget wonks parse through t. >> that is the point. and congressman, i guess the question bob and i talked about, there's a lot of spending pain in there, democrats have to go back to folks and say, hey this is the pain you have to suffer. are you prepared to do that? >> there's no question. these are tough issues why there has been hammering and wrang ling. i believe a democratic congress, especially in the house and in
the senate that are willing to make those tough choices, that know in the long term, they have entitlements and we have to make sure there is revenue raising part of it and four years now the republicans unwilling to do that i think election will get them in gear. >> talk about this election, chuck todd, bleary eyed but still tough here on the sunday after the election. how is it the president won? >> demographics, pure and simple. people want to talk about san day and all of these other things. when you look at the structure of electorate, i think he wins on september 6th, october 6th or november 6th. here is y show you the makeup of the american voting electorate. in 2004, 2008 and 2012, white to non-white. look at the -- it is a trend line. by the way, two or three points, keep going back. we went back to 2000, '96, unmistakable, the trend line here. what happened, mitt romney, fewer whites, mitt romney's campaign truly believed the
electorate would look like 2008. did not believe it was going to look like what it ended up looking like which, of course you can the obama campaign. two stays in the particular show you how the dramatic changes. the state of ohio, moved from 83-17, white/non-white to 17/21. mostly african-americans in the northern part of the state. here is the state of florida. you want to know how president obama one the state of florida, look at this went from 71/29 white to non-white to 67/34. all of this growth was non-cuban hispanic bus a few notes on the hispanic vote, the president won kuhns. that is something that actually has got lost in all of this yes, did he really well hispanics in florida in general and overall but he won cubans, third generation cubans. they weren't there for the bay of pigs, they don't think about hating kennedy and the democrats the way those first two generation. finally, i want to show you this mapship. a map of the top seine ten state buys population with hispanics in it the top ten, the ones in blue are the ones the president
won, the two in red with the two mitt romney won. republicans, watch out, these two are next. i would say arizona will be in the battleground in 2016. texas, joaquin may have a different -- probably not quite because texas republicans a long time ago saw this and they have tried to adjust. by the way, case you are wondering, just these ten states, 216 electoral votes. steve? >> no it's incredible and coming for a long time. the last presidential candidate to get 60% of the white vote, which mitt romney did was george herbert walker bush and received over 400 electoral votes. today, gets you an electoral college drumming. president george w. bush got 44% of the hispanic voite. the problem, there are too many republican leaders in congress. if you say the word latino and play a word association game with them, they would come back with illegal immigrant, not silver star winner, not doctor, not lawyer, not policeman, not fireman.
this is an important part of our communityship. an important part of the future of the republican party and the republican party needs to get it together on its outreach to late team knows and it's good hear that lindsey graham and chuck shumer are going to start advancing comprehensive immigration reform again because we have to get this off the table, a political issue for the party and we also have to have a zero toll perhaps with the terrible taupe coming out of the talk radio universe and some of our leaders in congress who are serially disrespectful to this fastest growing democrat in the country. you have the likes of rush limbaugh taking to the radio on the i shall a you of immigration. congressman this is what he said on wednesday. >> don't tell met republican party doesn't have outreach. we do. but what are we suppose dodd now in order to get the hispanic or latino vote, choose mean open the borders and embrace the i will sflee-- the illegals? i want to you think about this. is that what it means?
is that what the republican establishment, we got to reach out to hispanics, is that what they mean? if we are not getting the female vote, do we become pro-choice? do we start passing out birth control pills? is that what we have to do? >> and david, that's very telling because part of the fundamental problem with a big wing of the republican party is that when they think of hispanics, they think of folks who are illegal immigrants are. what they need to accept is that hispanics, late team knows are part of this american family and they are not going anywhere. you have to folks that have been here who are second generation, third generation, fourth generation americans and they are making them feel like they are not part of the united states. and that's fundamental problem that goes beyond tone. it goes beyond rhetoric and it actually goes beyond who you elect to congress or the senate. they have got ted cruz, marco rubio and others now, but more than just the personality but the policies they pursue. >> think when journalists wry
bri this campaigning the fun part will be all the moments we experienced together, the gaffes romney made, the 47%, the things obama said the first debate but the fundamental loss of this campaign probably took place in the republican primaries when they put out a group of people who were so far off the political cliff on i shalls that mattered to latinos, women and young people and is the new governing coalition and perhaps the fact that the economy got a little bit better is another fundamental fact but all these other things preoccupied us for some time. you can only, looking back, see those 20 debates that bushed everybody, including romney who became a moderate much too late to get that nomination. >> it is still striking. you have some 70% in the exit polls who believe the economy is in bad shape, 52% who feel like the country is off on the wrong direction. a lot of opposition thought to president obama and his policies and yet he prevails because of a coalition ever expanding that believes in a certain role for government, bob, that is opposed
to where the republicans would like to take it. >> i think the big picture here is that president obama has got to deliver on the big issue, which is fixing the financial house of the u.s. federal government, it is in disarray, not just the fiscal cliff but $16 trillion in ious out in the world. in a couple of months, in february or march, they are going to have to renegotiate borrowing authority for another trillion or two dollars and if the president can fix and put us on some sort of path of restoration for the economy, that is a pay juv for everyone in the community you not just his base. he has got to think much more broadly, the job of the president is to find the next same of good for a real majority and escapable of doing.
>> let's look back at the republican party. how did they become a coalition of special interest forces? they really do look like the democratic party of the '70s and '80s where they seem to the leaders in washington can't control the special interest groups. and this is what happened to the democrats, labor, all of these special interest groups that were -- the folks in washington knew what the right way was to try to whip national elections, they couldn't quite do it because they were -- basically, they succumbed to their base the democratic party started with bill clint and obama successfully able to carry this over, never able to allow the base of the democratic party, special interest groups, to overtake the national message, the republican party -- >> the serious governing philosophy thatter is thfd country well but too many swing voters in the country, you hear the word conservative now, they think of looms and wackos. we gave pup five u.s. senate seats the last two election cycles by people who were just out there, completely extreme,
manifestly up prepared for the offices that they are running for. our elected leaders scared to death of the conservative entertainment complex, the shrill and divisive voices that are bombastic and broadcasting out into the homes and this country is rejecting the social extremism of the republican party on issue after issue. if you look at the four states that legalized gay marriage, on a range of issues, our coalition is shrink and the republican party has a lot of soul searching to do if we are going to assemble a majority. >> doris, i want to get to one other thing here earthquake the movie "lincoln" is opening around the country. obviously, the divisions in america were so profound at that time during the civil war. and yet today in a different way, we still have so much po r polarizati polarization. here is moment in the film where linkson talking about why do is so important to push for the abolition of slavery. >> euclid's first common notion
is this, things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other. that's rule of mathematical reasoning. it is true because it works, has done and always will do. in his book, hmm, euclid says this is self-evident there it, even in that 2,000-year-old book of mechanical law, is self-evident that truths equal to the same thing are equal to each other. >> can't way to the see t you brought your own movie clip, as chuck pointed out, the polarization then, so profound, as this president now strives to be a great president, like lincoln, what is his challenge to break this polarization? does it come back to bipartisanship? >> conviction, which we saw lincoln talking about and
willingness to compromise. without question, the whole movie is about the idea that in a session of congress, after the election in 1864, they have to get this amendment passeded a do everything he says, one point he says i'm clothed by immense power and i will use it, to do what you have to do i will go back to what bob said wharkts president needs to do is bring some ceos into his top positions, ddr did that brought in the head of chrysler, brought in the head of sears and roebuck. what about bringing romney in to deal with the problem of how do you keep manufacturing here than going ablood is what incentive douse use, sanctions do you use against countries not doing things fairly? you bring people in but don't lose your conviction, tough start with what matter to us but you compromise on everything else? i think it can be done. >> the powerful olive branch that speaker boehner issued this week, where he said to the president, we want you to lead, for the republican leader to say we are willing to follow to a certain extent, he puts limitations on it, there's no
question on it but for him to say that you're going to go into the house of representatives -- >> you think, bob, part of what you see and see with john boehner, he will say one thing vand to reverse course the very next day, and that is the challenge chuck was speaking to >> "the new york times" story points out and some people i have talked to i think he is getting more control and more authority in the house. >> we will see. authority in the house. >> we willthis country was built by working people. the economy needs manufacturing. machines, tools, people making stuff. companies have to invest in making things. infrastructure, construction, production. we need it now more than ever. chevron's putting more than $8 billion dollars back in the u.s. economy this year. in pipes, cement, steel, jobs, energy. we need to get the wheels turning. i'm proud of that. making real things... for real. ...that make a real difference. ♪
for real. ...that make a real difference. i'i invest in what i know.r. i turned 65 last week. i'm getting married. planning a life. there are risks, sure. but, there's no reward without it. i want to be prepared for the long haul. i see a world bursting with opportunities. india, china, brazil, ishares, small-caps, large-caps, ishares. industrials. low cost. every dollar counts. ishares. income. dividends. bonds. i like bonds. ishares. commodities. diversification. choices. my own ideas. ishares. i want to use the same stuff the big guys use. ishares. 9 out of 10 large, professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. introducing the ishares core, etfs for the heart of your portfolio. tax efficient and low cost building blocks to help you keep more of what you earn. call your advisor. visit ishares.com. ishares. yeah, ishares. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing.
thanks to you all for a terrific conversation. before we go a quick programming note for my press pass covers this week, i sat down with buzzfeed.com editor and chief ben smith to talk about what really really was the first presidential campaign in the social media era. you can watch it at "meet the press" nbc.com, that's all for today. a special day for "meet the press," as we celebrate turning 65 years old, proud to be the longest-running television program in the world. truly is humbling to be a custodian of such an important for 30 some years at many different park service units across the united states. the only time i've ever had a break is when i was on maternity leave. i have retired from doing this one thing that i loved. now, i'm going to be able to have the time to explore something different. it's like another chapter.
the capability of a pathfinder with the comfort of a sedan? ♪ so you went right back to the pathfinder's essence, kept its dna, and created the next-gen s.u.v. starting with a drivetrain that gives best-in-class fuel economy of 26 miles per gallon, highway... ♪ ...and intuitive 4-wheel drive? ♪ if inside it had best-in-class front, head, and leg room and interior roominess? and outside, best-in-class standard towing of 5,000 pounds? ♪ [ whistles ] [ all scream, laugh ] [ male announcer ] yeah, that would be cool. introducing the all-new nissan pathfinder. it's our most innovative pathfinder ever.